NSW Caselaw
[2001] ANZ ConvR 486 (2001) NSW ConvR 55-970 Reported Decision : [2001] NSWSC 202 (2001) 10 BPR 18, 713 [2001] ACL Rep 355 NSW 18
New South Wales Supreme Court
CITATION : Paul Lederer & Anor v John Bowie-Wilson & Anor [2001] NSWSC 202 CURRENT JURISDICTION: Equity Division FILE NUMBER(S) : SC 1562 of 2001 HEARING DATE(S) : 16 March 2001 JUDGMENT DATE : 27 March 2001
Paul Lederer (First Plaintiff) PARTIES : Eva Marie Lederer (Second Plaintiff) John Bowie-Wilson (First Defendant) Sally Elizabeth Bowie-Wilson (Second Defendant) JUDGMENT OF : Bergin J
COUNSEL : BJ Preston SC/F Kunc (Plaintiffs) NC Hutley SC (Defendants) SOLICITORS : Landerer & Co (Plaintiffs) Corrs Chambers Westgarth (Defendants) CATCHWORDS : Interpretation of restrictive covenant - Whether Jacuzzi is a swimming pool. LEGISLATION CITED : Home Building Act 1989 Swimming Pools Act 1992 (NSW) Bowie-Wilson & Anor v Lederer & Anor NSWSC, Young J, unreported 20 May 1999 House of Peace Pty Ltd v Bankstown City Council (2000) 48 NSWLR 498 CASES CITED : Perth Shire v O'Keefe (1964) 110 CLR 529 Royal Agricultural Society of New South Wales v Sydney City Council (1987) 61 LGRA 305 [Easements and Restrictive Covenants in Australia 2nd Edition, Bradbrook & Neave, Butterworths 2000] DECISION : Jacuzzi not prohibited by restrictive covenant. Summons dismissed.
THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES EQUITY DIVISION
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate